BGP Extensions for BIER
draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-19

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, bier-chairs@ietf.org, bier@ietf.org, chen.ran@zte.com.cn, draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions@ietf.org, gunter@vandevelde.cc, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, zzhang@juniper.net
Subject: Protocol Action: 'BGP Extensions for BIER' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-19.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'BGP Extensions for BIER'
  (draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-19.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Bit Indexed Explicit Replication Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Gunter Van de Velde, Jim Guichard and John
Scudder.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is a new multicast forwarding
   architecture which doesn't require an explicit tree-building protocol
   and doesn't require intermediate routers to maintain per-tree
   multicast states.  Some BIER-specific information and state, which
   are only in proportion to the network but not per-tree, do need to be
   advertised, calculated, and maintained.  This document describes BGP
   extensions for advertising the BIER information and methods for
   calculating BIER states based on the advertisement.

Working Group Summary

   Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting?
   For example, was there controversy about particular points 
   or were there decisions where the consensus was
   particularly rough? 

There was no controversy during the evolution of this document.
No threats of appeals. 

Document Quality

   Are there existing implementations of the protocol?  Have a 
   significant number of vendors indicated their plan to
   implement the specification?  Are there any reviewers that
   merit special mention as having done a thorough review,
   e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a
   conclusion that the document had no substantive issues?  If
   there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type, or other Expert Review,
   what was its course (briefly)?  In the case of a Media Type
   Review, on what date was the request posted?

No known implementations, with couple of implementers indicating future intent. 
Few notable reviews are: 
Jeff Haas (IDR chair) ( https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/0DJl_L6tWpBjfzbq2HO83IHEafA/ )
and Adrian Farrel ( https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/V4Xu5Lgfo6yzsWPmbXWu9Pq0gCg/ )
This document has been reviewed by both IDR and BIER WG members

Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Ran Chen. The Responsible
   Area Director is Gunter Van de Velde.

IANA Note

  	IANA review state: IANA OK - Actions Needed

RFC Editor Note